85
85
Jun 26, 2013
06/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 85
favorite 0
quote 0
doma prevented me from sponsoring him for a green card. that meant at the expiration of his work-sponsored visa, he was going to have to return to the u.k. i was faced with a choice of either living my life in the u.s. with him in the u.k. or going with him to the u.k. i chose the latter. that was the right decision for us, but it opened the door to tremendous hardship because it was difficult enough leaving my life behind in new york but starting a new one from scratch as a foreigner in a new country. well, that was quite a challenge. >> and what now are the steps that you can take if you so choose to come back home? >> well, suddenly as of today, i'm eligible to sponsor my partner for immigration status. we are encage egaged to be marr. there's such a thing as a fiance visa, a green card, if we get married, which we will next year. that's great. it's important to remember that as wonderful as today's decision is, what the supreme court did not do was to wave a magic wand in the air and undo all of the damage that doma has caused. you kno
doma prevented me from sponsoring him for a green card. that meant at the expiration of his work-sponsored visa, he was going to have to return to the u.k. i was faced with a choice of either living my life in the u.s. with him in the u.k. or going with him to the u.k. i chose the latter. that was the right decision for us, but it opened the door to tremendous hardship because it was difficult enough leaving my life behind in new york but starting a new one from scratch as a foreigner in a new...
65
65
Mar 28, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 65
favorite 0
quote 0
, section three of doma. and no one has identified any legitimate federal interest that is being served by congress's decision for the first time in our nation's history to undermine the determination of the sovereign states with respect to eligibility for marriage. i would respectfully contend that this is because there is none. rather, as the title of the statute makes clear, doma was enacted to defend against the rights of gay people. this was rooted in moral -- >> what do you think is -- the argument that i heard was to put the other side, at least one part of it, as i understand it, look, the federal government needs a uniform rule. there has been this uniform one man-one woman rule for several hundred years, whatever, and there's a revolution going on in the states. we either adopt the revolution or push is along a little, or we stay out of it. and i think mr. clement was saying, we need to stay out of it. the way to stay out is to go with the traditional thing. that's an argument. so your answer is wha
, section three of doma. and no one has identified any legitimate federal interest that is being served by congress's decision for the first time in our nation's history to undermine the determination of the sovereign states with respect to eligibility for marriage. i would respectfully contend that this is because there is none. rather, as the title of the statute makes clear, doma was enacted to defend against the rights of gay people. this was rooted in moral -- >> what do you think is...
83
83
Dec 9, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 83
favorite 0
quote 0
one is doma, defense of marriage act. this administration won't defend it in the courts. if that gets struck down, what does that say to cases where people have been allowed to marry in the same gender. what happens if doma gets struck down by the court, 5-4, whatever. >> the ridiculously named defense of marriage act would be gone. >> what would it mean to a person married? >> that would bemean couples married in those states would be recognized by the federal government. would mean we still have a lot of work to do and depending how they rule in the prop 8 case we still need other states to move forward with the right to marry. >> an honor to have you on and elizabeth, glad to have you back in a much bigger studio now. the republican establishment at war with his crazy wing, said they lost election because i ideologues pulled mitt romney too far to the right. wrong says the right ring, we lost because mitt romney wasn't right wing enough. the winner will determine whether the gop returns to the center or becomes a more fringy party. >>> two people get in the room. the p
one is doma, defense of marriage act. this administration won't defend it in the courts. if that gets struck down, what does that say to cases where people have been allowed to marry in the same gender. what happens if doma gets struck down by the court, 5-4, whatever. >> the ridiculously named defense of marriage act would be gone. >> what would it mean to a person married? >> that would bemean couples married in those states would be recognized by the federal government....
132
132
Mar 27, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 132
favorite 0
quote 1
can one house of congress defend doma without the other? third, even if one house could, did a committee have the power to intervene, and fourth does the administration of the president's agreement to deprive the supreme court of the judds. again, remember, the obama administration informed eric holder not to enforce doma, but it seems like a game of chicken with the president says i want the supreme court to do this, and the supreme court saying why isn't the president enforcing this or trying to do something on his own accord. it's an odd, trying two-step right now. about you we'll know full well by 2:00 when we have the full audio. >> jeffrey, i wanted to give you a chance to speak to thomas' points. >> i think he summarized the dilemma very accurately, and john roberts said, can you name a single case in history where congress has had the power -- or one house of congress has had the power to defend an act ofeniof that the president has not defended? we all knew that conservative justices might be skeptical, but the fact that liberal ju
can one house of congress defend doma without the other? third, even if one house could, did a committee have the power to intervene, and fourth does the administration of the president's agreement to deprive the supreme court of the judds. again, remember, the obama administration informed eric holder not to enforce doma, but it seems like a game of chicken with the president says i want the supreme court to do this, and the supreme court saying why isn't the president enforcing this or trying...
152
152
Mar 27, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 152
favorite 0
quote 1
only section 3 of doma is up for debate. that the portion that defines the word, marriage, as one man and one woman as husband and wife for the federal government. but it impacts about 1100 benefits. that's what today's argument are about. think social security. federal estate and income tax as well as medical and family leave. same-sex couples who are legally married don get them. simply because they are gay. at the center of today's case is an 83-year-old new yorker, edie windsor, forced to pay $338,000 in federal estate taxes when her wife died. >> i am today an out lesbian who just sued the united states of america, which is kind of overwhelming for me. i realized that federal government was treating us as strangers and i paid a humungous estate tax. and it meant selling a lot of stuff to do it, and it wasn't easy. i live o on fixed income and it wasn't easy. >> inside the supreme court today, j six justices question whether doma is really about discrimination. take a listen to some of them. >> for the federal government
only section 3 of doma is up for debate. that the portion that defines the word, marriage, as one man and one woman as husband and wife for the federal government. but it impacts about 1100 benefits. that's what today's argument are about. think social security. federal estate and income tax as well as medical and family leave. same-sex couples who are legally married don get them. simply because they are gay. at the center of today's case is an 83-year-old new yorker, edie windsor, forced to...
79
79
Mar 27, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 79
favorite 0
quote 0
and doma was about fear. it was about president clinton who wanted to get re-elected and republicans were about to do something and he felt he had to do what was necessary to sign this legislation. there are a lot of people, including myself, opposed to doma from the very beginning and i think that there was a lack of political courage on all parties at that point in the early 1990s. but times have changed. times have changed since 2004 when john kerry didn't even support marriage equality. we as presidential nominee for democratic party. we are now in 2013. we have a president of the united states who supports marriage equality. majority of americans support marriage equality. more members of congress are coming out to say this. in supreme court there is an inclination times have changed and they are coming to grips with that reality. >> let me read what our first teams say about speaker bainer. speaker boehner and house republicans spent millions to dough fend the act in court after the obama administration
and doma was about fear. it was about president clinton who wanted to get re-elected and republicans were about to do something and he felt he had to do what was necessary to sign this legislation. there are a lot of people, including myself, opposed to doma from the very beginning and i think that there was a lack of political courage on all parties at that point in the early 1990s. but times have changed. times have changed since 2004 when john kerry didn't even support marriage equality. we...
77
77
Mar 28, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 77
favorite 0
quote 0
today doma. as perhaps expecting that the court would issue some kind of sweeping ruling on gay rights. and it doesn't seem that that's going to be the case. certainly not from the prop 8 argument yesterday where the court seemed to be searching for the narrowest possible way to permit marriage to resume only in california without setting a national precedent. and today if a majority of -- or if justice kennedy is the controlling vote here and he sees this more as federalism than discrimination, that could be a very narrow opinion as well. >> pete, let's look at this thing. here's justice kennedy. it focuses on his concerns about the defense of marriage act. i think he's going to strike it down. doma. and how it interferes with state rights, as you say. let's listen. >> when it has 1,100 laws, which in our society means that the federal government is intertwined with the citizens' day-to-day life, you are at -- at real risk of running in conflict with what has always been thought to be the essenc
today doma. as perhaps expecting that the court would issue some kind of sweeping ruling on gay rights. and it doesn't seem that that's going to be the case. certainly not from the prop 8 argument yesterday where the court seemed to be searching for the narrowest possible way to permit marriage to resume only in california without setting a national precedent. and today if a majority of -- or if justice kennedy is the controlling vote here and he sees this more as federalism than...
93
93
Feb 25, 2013
02/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 93
favorite 0
quote 0
lgbt rights and attorney co-founder of the doma project. we'll be back with our producer's pick today. [ male announcer ] this is kevin. to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again. and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. ♪ [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap. tens of thousands of dollars in hidden fees on their 401(k)s?! go to e-trade and roll over your old 401(k)s to a new e-trade retirement account. none of them charge annual fees and all of them offer low cost investments. e-trade. less for us. more for you. and all of them offer low cost investments. exciting and would always come max and pto my rescue. bookstore but as time passed, i started to notice max just wasn't himself. and i knew he'd feel better if he lost a little weight. so
lgbt rights and attorney co-founder of the doma project. we'll be back with our producer's pick today. [ male announcer ] this is kevin. to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again. and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my...
112
112
Jun 27, 2013
06/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 112
favorite 0
quote 0
the decision was about doma. it's really clear about i the ringing declarations that equality means equality. including for gay people and in the context of gay people's family relationships, this is a building block going-forward. >> anthony kennedy cites the fifth amendment of the constitution, and the violation of equal protection, that constitution pertains in every state. >> joining me now is congressman lee. she's a founding member and vice chair of the lgbt caucus. my question for you is, you are a very outspoken progressive, you're part of the broad coalition that is progressivism, and the liberals in america. what does today mean for that broad coalition that includes people from so many walks of life. so many races and creeds and cultures and backgroundses and circumstances, what does today's decision mean for that coalition. >> i tell you, today we reaffirm that there is equal justice under the law. this was a major decision for those who believed that discrimination is wrong. for those who believed th
the decision was about doma. it's really clear about i the ringing declarations that equality means equality. including for gay people and in the context of gay people's family relationships, this is a building block going-forward. >> anthony kennedy cites the fifth amendment of the constitution, and the violation of equal protection, that constitution pertains in every state. >> joining me now is congressman lee. she's a founding member and vice chair of the lgbt caucus. my...
146
146
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 146
favorite 0
quote 0
what happens it doma gets struck down by the court, 5-4 or whatever? >> the ridiculously named defense of marriage act would be gone obviously. >> what would it mean to a gay person who is married? >> that would mean that couples who are married in those states as well as the district of columbia, their marriages would be recognized by the federal government. now, it would mean we still have a lot of work to do, and depending on how they rule in the prop 8 case, we would still need other states to move forward with the right to marry. >> right. >> thank you. it's an honor to have you on and your organization. elizabeth birch, we are in a much bigger studio. >>> the republican establishment is at war with its crazy wing. they say they lost the election because ideologues pulled mitt romney foo far to the right. that sounds reasonable. wrong says the right wing. we lost because mitt romney wasn't right wing enough. the winner of this little tango will determine whether the gop moves to the center where it might find some votes or becomes an even more fri
what happens it doma gets struck down by the court, 5-4 or whatever? >> the ridiculously named defense of marriage act would be gone obviously. >> what would it mean to a gay person who is married? >> that would mean that couples who are married in those states as well as the district of columbia, their marriages would be recognized by the federal government. now, it would mean we still have a lot of work to do, and depending on how they rule in the prop 8 case, we would still...
125
125
Jun 26, 2013
06/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 125
favorite 0
quote 0
that doma was going to be struck down because on equal protection grounds, there's just no way for doma to stand. but prop 8 was the one, the case where folks wondered, is the court really going to listen to ted olson and do the complete -- there's a constitutional right 0 marry, or are they going to punt on issue and declare that the folks in california who were trying to keep prop 8, they didn't have the standing, which would allow gay marriages to go forward in california without addressing the cosmic question as i call it. so what had sets up is sort of another shoe is going to have to drop. remember the court did not want to take the prop 8 case. they didn't want to have a this question. so what they've done is really by buy themselves some time and buy the country some time for more states on their own to adopt marriage equality so that when the next case oms comes, they'll be able to do it and hopefully by then the court will be completely different. >> i think it's more significant than that if i might. it's important to remember in equal protection cases particularly when it ca
that doma was going to be struck down because on equal protection grounds, there's just no way for doma to stand. but prop 8 was the one, the case where folks wondered, is the court really going to listen to ted olson and do the complete -- there's a constitutional right 0 marry, or are they going to punt on issue and declare that the folks in california who were trying to keep prop 8, they didn't have the standing, which would allow gay marriages to go forward in california without addressing...
71
71
Jul 1, 2013
07/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 71
favorite 0
quote 0
and even in the doma -- >> did they reject it or side step it? >> clearly the votes were not there. kennedy has wanted to go there ever since the lawrence decision last decade, but the votes are not there and i don't expect the votes to be there anytime soon. and i also don't buy into this notion of history that this is an inevitable train and this is where we're going to go. even after this decision, david, 70% of the american people live in states that define marriage as between a man and a woman. 32 of those states passed referendums with an average margin of 57% and in a cbs "new york times" poll on june 9th, 60% of the american people and a majority of democrats said they want this resolved at the state level not the federal level. >> how does that dynamic change? because there is a huge part of the country and in many states where they're simply in the on board with the notion that gays and lesbians have the right to marry. but we've also looked at the social and political change that's occurred so rapidly. >> let me represent the that it's not necessarily inevitable progress,
and even in the doma -- >> did they reject it or side step it? >> clearly the votes were not there. kennedy has wanted to go there ever since the lawrence decision last decade, but the votes are not there and i don't expect the votes to be there anytime soon. and i also don't buy into this notion of history that this is an inevitable train and this is where we're going to go. even after this decision, david, 70% of the american people live in states that define marriage as between a...
98
98
Mar 28, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 98
favorite 0
quote 0
doma doesn't seem fair. while the court will not rule until june, it appears that a majority of justices are leaning towards striking down the law. the four liberal justices argued that the law was discriminatory. >> it affects every area of life, and so you are really diminishing what the state has said is marriage. you're saying, no, state -- there are two kinds of marriages. the full marriage and then this sort of skim milk marriage. >> what gives the federal government the right to be concerned at all at what the definition of marriage is. so they can create a class they don't like, or a class that they consider is suspect in the marriage category. >> justice anthony kennedy, the court's traditional swing vote, seemed prepared to rule against doma, citing not discrimination at the root of his concern, but state's rights. >> when it has 1,100 laws, which in our society means the federal government is intertwined with the citizens' day-to-day life, you are, at real risk of running in conflict with what has
doma doesn't seem fair. while the court will not rule until june, it appears that a majority of justices are leaning towards striking down the law. the four liberal justices argued that the law was discriminatory. >> it affects every area of life, and so you are really diminishing what the state has said is marriage. you're saying, no, state -- there are two kinds of marriages. the full marriage and then this sort of skim milk marriage. >> what gives the federal government the right...
155
155
Mar 27, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 155
favorite 0
quote 1
, if they strike down doma. marriage equality won't be the law of the land. in all the states that legally recognize smarame-sex marriagesy marriage has to be valid in the federal government's eyes. where i live i'm legally married. >> it's not that mississippi would have to accept a marriage from massachusetts. >> the state of mississippi would have to determine their own marriage guidelines. >> one question that i have which is fascinating as a lay person. what is the real connection from yesterday's case to today's case? there seemed to be overlapping factors. when you read it, you have to understand it. it's distrust with the overlap. what's the real connection? >> yesterday's case i think is a much harder issue for the court. when the supreme court declares the existence of the fundamental right, that's a huge deal. about as big as it gets for the supreme court. that's a difficult thing for a conservative court to do. that's what the justices were feeling uncomfortable with. they can get their hands around
, if they strike down doma. marriage equality won't be the law of the land. in all the states that legally recognize smarame-sex marriagesy marriage has to be valid in the federal government's eyes. where i live i'm legally married. >> it's not that mississippi would have to accept a marriage from massachusetts. >> the state of mississippi would have to determine their own marriage guidelines. >> one question that i have which is fascinating as a lay person. what is the real...
95
95
Mar 28, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 95
favorite 0
quote 0
>> well, the chief justice also faulted president obama for enforcing doma but not defending it. >> if he has made a determination that executing the law by enforcing the terms is unconstitutional, i don't see why he doesn't have the courage of his convictions and execute not only the statute but do it consistent with his view of the constitution, rather than saying, oh, we'll wait until the supreme court tells us we have no choice. >> the white house press office responded saying the president enforces plenty of laws he doesn't agree with. the "wall street journal" editorial board, meanwhile, reacted this morning, writing in part, "america's cultural and media elites are attempting to browbeat the high court into coercing the country into recognizing same-sex marriage by casting opponents as bigots for holding a position that president obama held less than a year ago." let's bring in pulitzer prize-winning editorial writer for "the washington post" and msnbc contributor jonathan capar. do you want to comment on that first. >> well, look, the "wall street journal" editorial board was n
>> well, the chief justice also faulted president obama for enforcing doma but not defending it. >> if he has made a determination that executing the law by enforcing the terms is unconstitutional, i don't see why he doesn't have the courage of his convictions and execute not only the statute but do it consistent with his view of the constitution, rather than saying, oh, we'll wait until the supreme court tells us we have no choice. >> the white house press office responded...
100
100
Jun 27, 2013
06/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 100
favorite 0
quote 0
striking down a law passed by congress in 1996 the defense of marriage act known as doma. that blocked the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages in the states that allow them. depriving them of benefits that other married couples have. in a 5-4 ruling, the court said that doma serves no government purpose and it demeans those in a same-sex relationship. in the second 5-4 decision, this time by chief justice roberts the court tossed an appeal involving california's proposition 8 passed by voters in 2008. it stopped same-sex marriage in the state. the people who put it on the ballot had no right to appeal. for the two california couples who challenged the law that's the answer they wanted now, we'll be marry and we'll be kwal to every other family in california. >> reporter: their interview on msnbc was interrupted by a call from the president on air force one. >> we thank you so much for your support. >> you should be very proud of today and through your courage, you're helping out a whole lot of people everywhere. >> reporte >> i'm pleased that the court d
striking down a law passed by congress in 1996 the defense of marriage act known as doma. that blocked the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages in the states that allow them. depriving them of benefits that other married couples have. in a 5-4 ruling, the court said that doma serves no government purpose and it demeans those in a same-sex relationship. in the second 5-4 decision, this time by chief justice roberts the court tossed an appeal involving california's proposition 8...
104
104
Mar 27, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 104
favorite 0
quote 0
or prosecute any doma specific cases. and then over the summer of last year, coming out in a full throated endorsement for marriage equality before his re-election. it would be quite a contradiction if the president had come out for marriage equality but was having his department of justice go after and criminalize doma-style cases and knowing full well it was headed to the supreme court anyway. >> you know, jonathan, it's interesting. again, this idea that the justices as you pointed out seem to be trying to find these various off ramps, you know, sort of not have to decide or not make a sweeping decision, the language we heard yesterday. yet this is an issue that has overwhelming public support. it is an issue that has garnered a lot of public attention. it just strikes me as, i don't know, i'll just say it, a little bit of a lack of courage. though i thought some of the women members had some of the best questions to be honest. made some of the best points. we need the supreme court to have a little courage here, right
or prosecute any doma specific cases. and then over the summer of last year, coming out in a full throated endorsement for marriage equality before his re-election. it would be quite a contradiction if the president had come out for marriage equality but was having his department of justice go after and criminalize doma-style cases and knowing full well it was headed to the supreme court anyway. >> you know, jonathan, it's interesting. again, this idea that the justices as you pointed out...
169
169
Mar 27, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 169
favorite 0
quote 0
some say doma may be in trouble. >>> also, congressman john lewis who passionately fought against doma in 1996 -- >> i will not turn my back on another american. i will not my fellow human being. >> he will join us live for the "news nation" conversation on the supreme court. >>> plus, the fight over the reward money tied to the chris dorner case. a million dollars at stake. but mrs. now a battle over who led police to the man who killed four l.a. officers. it is all coming up next on "news nation." we've all had those moments. when you lost the thing you can't believe you lost. when what you just bought, just broke. or when you have a little trouble a long way from home... as an american express cardmember you can expect some help. but what you might not expect, is you can get all this with a prepaid card. spends like cash. feels like membership. would absolutely not have taken a zip line in the jungle. i'm really glad that girl stayed at home. vo: expedia helps 30 million travelers a month find what they're looking for. one traveler at a time. expedia. find yours. "news nation" is br
some say doma may be in trouble. >>> also, congressman john lewis who passionately fought against doma in 1996 -- >> i will not turn my back on another american. i will not my fellow human being. >> he will join us live for the "news nation" conversation on the supreme court. >>> plus, the fight over the reward money tied to the chris dorner case. a million dollars at stake. but mrs. now a battle over who led police to the man who killed four l.a....
127
127
Jun 26, 2013
06/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 127
favorite 0
quote 0
actually, under doma. so, i mean, doma, the thing about striking down doma, it doesn't affect any state's right to ban or to allow same-sex marriage. so the fight still remains to be fought in those remaining 38 states. all it means, if a state says that a same-sex couple is married, the federal government will defer and give the 1,138 benefits that accrue to that marriage, you know, to that couple. >> which is going to make for a weird, real-life experience for a lot of couples. it really is. it's not hard to travel to another state in your own country and get married if you're really determined to do it and you have the resources to do it. when you go home and you have federal recognition, you can file your taxes together. the military recognizes the status of your marriage if you are -- one of you is in the military. but your state doesn't. how many people know what the difference is and the practical implications of your marriage that come from the state versus that come from the federal government? no
actually, under doma. so, i mean, doma, the thing about striking down doma, it doesn't affect any state's right to ban or to allow same-sex marriage. so the fight still remains to be fought in those remaining 38 states. all it means, if a state says that a same-sex couple is married, the federal government will defer and give the 1,138 benefits that accrue to that marriage, you know, to that couple. >> which is going to make for a weird, real-life experience for a lot of couples. it...
137
137
Jun 27, 2013
06/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 137
favorite 0
quote 0
the doma case and the california prop 8 case. mr. griffin said he was going to go to california to celebrate in california, but then tomorrow he was going somewhere else to get back to work. >> it also says to that young person in hope, arkansas or altoona, pennsylvania, that marriage equality is coming to them very soon. this entire team is on our way to california to celebrate tonight and tomorrow morning i wake up and go to salt lake city utah to a red state. >> to salt lake city? to utah. utah, where same sex marriage is most assuredly not legal. the reason you go there next, though, is because here's what's going to happen. some happy couple looks like sean and steven, maybe. some happy couple who's married in new york or married in iowa is going to get transferred to utah for work, and that couple with their kids, pay their taxes, own property together, whose lives are totally interwoven thanks to all the normal boring stuff that interweaves our lives. what happens when they get there, utah unmarries them? not here, it doesn't
the doma case and the california prop 8 case. mr. griffin said he was going to go to california to celebrate in california, but then tomorrow he was going somewhere else to get back to work. >> it also says to that young person in hope, arkansas or altoona, pennsylvania, that marriage equality is coming to them very soon. this entire team is on our way to california to celebrate tonight and tomorrow morning i wake up and go to salt lake city utah to a red state. >> to salt lake...
129
129
Mar 27, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 129
favorite 0
quote 0
and social security and been turned down due to doma. and how hurtful was that that this happened on the heels of charlie's passing, know they knew full well of charlie's valiant battle? >> yes, it was hurtful, however, it gives me hope. charlie and i knew that this was possible that our family would be left out of whatever decision was made in the long run, if she passed away before a decision was made. so, you know, in the end, even if something is not extended to me, the important part of our fight really is that other families across the nation will be recognized ultimately, receive benefits in recognition that is due to them as soldiers who put their life on the line for their country. >> i think it really is amazing to people to think that out of what evolved from repealing don't ask/don't tell, and charlie came out live on our air when don't ask/don't tell was repealed. that started our relationship with you. and that started our relationship with you coming on this program. is your hope for casey elena that this will rectified th
and social security and been turned down due to doma. and how hurtful was that that this happened on the heels of charlie's passing, know they knew full well of charlie's valiant battle? >> yes, it was hurtful, however, it gives me hope. charlie and i knew that this was possible that our family would be left out of whatever decision was made in the long run, if she passed away before a decision was made. so, you know, in the end, even if something is not extended to me, the important part...
148
148
Mar 9, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 148
favorite 0
quote 0
and in some senses, the doma case is the easier of the two. because there are nine states, including the district of columbia, where marriage is legal. and marriage is traditionally the prerogative of the state law. the problem is, the congress that is legislated this, in this particular case before the court, we have a woman who was partnered with the woman for years, when the new york court would finally recognize the marriage. and when her partner died. when her spouse died, then she had to pay $363,000 in federal estate taxes that she would not have had to pay if her spouse was a man instead of a woman. and i think that probably hits, for one of the better expression, the federalism sweet spot for at least five of the justices and maybe more. that new york recognized the marriage. and under the equal protection clause, she is being treated differently than other married couples, other legally married couples. >> when you talk about the federals and sweet spot there, this belief that sort of the center of the court is about that has a real
and in some senses, the doma case is the easier of the two. because there are nine states, including the district of columbia, where marriage is legal. and marriage is traditionally the prerogative of the state law. the problem is, the congress that is legislated this, in this particular case before the court, we have a woman who was partnered with the woman for years, when the new york court would finally recognize the marriage. and when her partner died. when her spouse died, then she had to...
74
74
Jun 26, 2013
06/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 74
favorite 0
quote 0
as i understand it, it says that doma is unconstitutional. it does not say that same-sex marriage is legal everywhere. that is ultimately i think going to become the next hope of the lgbt community. this means in places like new york that same-sex marriages are legal. it doesn't change or invalidate the states that have bans on same-sex marriage. >> that's the crux of it, right, michael? the court could have ruled that states cannot bar gay marriage that. would have been a broader ruling that would have applied to all of the states. in this case they're saying the federal government can focus on these states. it's great news for people in those states. what would be the next logical step for people in support of gay marriage. >> they ruled as far as they could rule plausibly. they through this procedural ruling allowed same-sex marriage to proceed in california which has 11% of the country's population. down the road one could imagine people asking the supreme court to issue a sweeping declaration that the equal protection clause requires mar
as i understand it, it says that doma is unconstitutional. it does not say that same-sex marriage is legal everywhere. that is ultimately i think going to become the next hope of the lgbt community. this means in places like new york that same-sex marriages are legal. it doesn't change or invalidate the states that have bans on same-sex marriage. >> that's the crux of it, right, michael? the court could have ruled that states cannot bar gay marriage that. would have been a broader ruling...
110
110
Mar 28, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 110
favorite 0
quote 0
court justices question constitutionality of doma." the liberal justices sharply questioned the law in court yesterday saying federal benefits denied to legally married same-sex couples have a profound effect. >> they touch every aspect of life. your partner is sick. social security. i mean, it's pervasive. the full marriage and then this sort of skim milk marriage. >> just kagan suggested congress was improperly discriminating when it passed the law in 1996. >> i'm going to quote from the house report here is that congress decided to reflect and honor a collective moral judgment and to express moral disapproval of homosexuality. >> joining me now supreme court correspondent for the huffington post mike sax. good to see you, mike. >> good to see you, mike. you were in the courtroom for both days. what was that like in there? >> it was tense, electric, quiet except for when the justice would say something that was funny, ridiculous in scalia's case sometimes and then laughs and fwgasps. it was quite a scene. >> the "new york times" said
court justices question constitutionality of doma." the liberal justices sharply questioned the law in court yesterday saying federal benefits denied to legally married same-sex couples have a profound effect. >> they touch every aspect of life. your partner is sick. social security. i mean, it's pervasive. the full marriage and then this sort of skim milk marriage. >> just kagan suggested congress was improperly discriminating when it passed the law in 1996. >> i'm going...
187
187
Feb 28, 2012
02/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 187
favorite 0
quote 0
-- not bring back defend doma. but he also was reported last week, has been courting unsuccessfully maggie gallagher who was head of the national organization for marriage, who made those horrific homophobic ads of lightning striking america if gay people were in partnerships or got married. so it's incredible hypocrisy. and i wonder what someone like paul singer's son said to him. romney can do a lot more damage than is going to happen, would have happened in new york state, if same-sex marriage hadn't passed. >> and i wonder, the thing that surprises me is that you read something like dick cheney lobbying for same-sex marriage. >> quietly. >> quietly in maryland. ken mehlman, former chair of the republican party, being integral to that effort in new york state and other states working on same-sex marriage rights. afer, americans for equal rights, the group that has been mobilizing high-profile republicans, really high-profile republicans. not pundits, former elected officials. people high-ranking in the party. >>
-- not bring back defend doma. but he also was reported last week, has been courting unsuccessfully maggie gallagher who was head of the national organization for marriage, who made those horrific homophobic ads of lightning striking america if gay people were in partnerships or got married. so it's incredible hypocrisy. and i wonder what someone like paul singer's son said to him. romney can do a lot more damage than is going to happen, would have happened in new york state, if same-sex...
76
76
Oct 27, 2015
10/15
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 76
favorite 0
quote 0
it was called the defense of marriage act, doma. brought forth, brought forth by a republican-led congress, and its purpose was clear -- to discriminate against gays and lesbians into the law. and let us all remember, the gay and lesbian rights were not popular then as they are today. its with a tough vote. and i'm sorry to have to tell you that that bill won by an overwhelming majority in the house of 342-57. that was not a political easy vote. now, today some are trying to rewrite history by saying they voted for one anti-gay law to stop something worse. that's not the case. there was a small minority in the house opposed to discriminating against our gay brothers and sisters, and i am proud that i was one of those members. >> senator bernie sanders speaking this weekend in iowa. and tonight he's here live for the interview. senator sanders, thank you so much for being here. it's really nice to see you back. >> great to be with you, rachel. >> so you have been remarkably consistent in your policy positions over the years. also you
it was called the defense of marriage act, doma. brought forth, brought forth by a republican-led congress, and its purpose was clear -- to discriminate against gays and lesbians into the law. and let us all remember, the gay and lesbian rights were not popular then as they are today. its with a tough vote. and i'm sorry to have to tell you that that bill won by an overwhelming majority in the house of 342-57. that was not a political easy vote. now, today some are trying to rewrite history by...
144
144
Jun 26, 2013
06/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 144
favorite 0
quote 0
if you look at the rationale in the doma cases -- the doma case and you apply that to proposition 8 and other rulings, it's a huge victory. we're very happy. we're not disappointed at all. >> ted, when we hear about the lieutenant governor of california on talking about there will be some cleanup necessary once california gets the legalese of this, is it your estimation that marriage licenses could be resumed by august? >> absolutely. we think that that will happen quickly. the governor and attorney general will move swiftly to bring marriage back to california so we say let the marriages begin as soon as possible. >> ted who is one of the attorneys representing one of the plaintiffs for prop 8. again, ted, congratulations to you and thanks for joining me today. i appreciate your time. >> thank you so much. >> absolutely. >>> for more impact on these decisions i want to bring in melissa harris-perry, host of the melissa harris-perry show right here on msnbc. your reaction to the supreme court decision on doma and prop 8. it's been a rocky week for rulings from the supreme court especial
if you look at the rationale in the doma cases -- the doma case and you apply that to proposition 8 and other rulings, it's a huge victory. we're very happy. we're not disappointed at all. >> ted, when we hear about the lieutenant governor of california on talking about there will be some cleanup necessary once california gets the legalese of this, is it your estimation that marriage licenses could be resumed by august? >> absolutely. we think that that will happen quickly. the...
146
146
Dec 10, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 146
favorite 0
quote 0
when the supremes get down to assessing doma, we can expect the conservatives to defend doma and the liberals to strike it down. the comp significance of the majority will be determined by the votes of chief justice roberts who has shown he's willing to leave the conservatives if he feels the court's legacy is in peril and kenne kennedy. he wrote the constitution prohibits laws singling out a certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status. it appears doma will get tossed in the dust bin of history. the courts other gay rights case comes from california which gave gays the right to marry and then with proposition 8 took it away. taking away an existing right because of animus was prohibited by the court in a '96 decision authored by justice kennedy. but where the doma case asks can the federal government discriminate against married couple, the prop 8 case asks can states bar gays from marrying. kennedy
when the supremes get down to assessing doma, we can expect the conservatives to defend doma and the liberals to strike it down. the comp significance of the majority will be determined by the votes of chief justice roberts who has shown he's willing to leave the conservatives if he feels the court's legacy is in peril and kenne kennedy. he wrote the constitution prohibits laws singling out a certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status. it appears doma will get tossed in the dust bin...
99
99
Jun 26, 2013
06/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 99
favorite 0
quote 0
now on doma, again, the supreme court says nothing about whether states must permit same-sex marriage. it is silent on that point. what it says is that when a state chooses to allow same-sex marriage, the federal government can't pick and choose and say, well, we're going to recognize opposite sex couples' marriages but not same-sex couples' marriages. justice kennedy says that part which was struck down today seems to be based on animus, on a desire to say that same-sex couples are not deserving of recognition by the federal government and justice kennedy and the majority that joins him says basically the federal government can't do that. that violates the constitution. so those -- that's the essence of the two holdings. states that have same-sex marriage legal recognition, the federal government must now recognize those marriages. those couples get all the benefits that an opposite sex couple would but states that don't allow same-sex marriage, they don't have to change anything. the decisions today say nothing as a legal matter about what they have to do. now it may well be that th
now on doma, again, the supreme court says nothing about whether states must permit same-sex marriage. it is silent on that point. what it says is that when a state chooses to allow same-sex marriage, the federal government can't pick and choose and say, well, we're going to recognize opposite sex couples' marriages but not same-sex couples' marriages. justice kennedy says that part which was struck down today seems to be based on animus, on a desire to say that same-sex couples are not...
95
95
Mar 28, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 95
favorite 0
quote 0
i was council during the doma proceedings. i remember how decidedly and openly and unapologetically bigoted that entire process was. we had two days of markup. i remember a colleague of mine who was counsel, happened to be gay, i remember seeing tears in his eyes because of the open bigotry that went on in that committee room, and it is just really disappointing you don't see the court wanting to tackle the central issue here. >> let's listen to the chairman of the republican party thinking out loud about what has happened to the public attitude that has changed so much on this issue. >> why is this an issue in which we are seeing support for same-sex marriage rise so rapidly in a really short period of time? >> i'm not sure, but i think it's obviously -- i think it is part of culture. i think it's an interesting topic to people, it's not all debts and math and deficits and long term, you know, credit scores and things like that. >> there you have it, jonathan capehart, there's no math. >> it is oh, so easy, it is an interesti
i was council during the doma proceedings. i remember how decidedly and openly and unapologetically bigoted that entire process was. we had two days of markup. i remember a colleague of mine who was counsel, happened to be gay, i remember seeing tears in his eyes because of the open bigotry that went on in that committee room, and it is just really disappointing you don't see the court wanting to tackle the central issue here. >> let's listen to the chairman of the republican party...
141
141
Nov 30, 2012
11/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 141
favorite 0
quote 0
who is going to defend doma before the high court? >> it's actually already happened because in the federal appeals courts when the justice department said it couldn't anymore defend a law because it concluded it was unconstitutional, house republicans stepped into carry on the legal battle and they are already here in the supreme court asking the court to take these cases. so they would defend the law. >> pete williams our man at the supreme court and we should note if there is a development here during this hour, of course pete will come back and we'll break it live. >> you bet. >>> let's bring in constitutional law expert robert shapiro. he's also a former clerk for retired supreme court justice john paul stevens. good afternoon to you, sir. >> good afternoon. >> as more states legalize same-sex marriage, is there going to be more pressure on the justices to address this issue? >> absolutely. i think the justices inevitably react to the trends that they see around. and as more and more states do it, this issue of what is going to b
who is going to defend doma before the high court? >> it's actually already happened because in the federal appeals courts when the justice department said it couldn't anymore defend a law because it concluded it was unconstitutional, house republicans stepped into carry on the legal battle and they are already here in the supreme court asking the court to take these cases. so they would defend the law. >> pete williams our man at the supreme court and we should note if there is a...
97
97
Mar 14, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 97
favorite 0
quote 0
i have come to believe doma is incompatible to our constitution. not a word of the constitution has changed since he signed the act. he was 18 points ahead of republican challenger, bob dole. his re-election was never seriously threatened that year. but president clinton, still under the influence of campaign consultant dick morris wasn't willing to lose in the polls over the defensive marriage act. one voted against the marriage act then. california boxer and diane finestein and the massachusetts governor voted against it from the state of oregon where his re-election was not assured. the bravest vote came from bob kerry, remember senting the state of nebraska. in his op-ed piece, which president clinton apologized for nothing, he wrote doma was opposed by only 81 of the 535 members of congress. the line reads as if clinton is trying to say, hey, everyone thought doma was a good thing but 14 senators knew better. 67 house members including nancy pelosi knew better. they never had to apologize for that vote. many who voted the wrong way an the defe
i have come to believe doma is incompatible to our constitution. not a word of the constitution has changed since he signed the act. he was 18 points ahead of republican challenger, bob dole. his re-election was never seriously threatened that year. but president clinton, still under the influence of campaign consultant dick morris wasn't willing to lose in the polls over the defensive marriage act. one voted against the marriage act then. california boxer and diane finestein and the...
160
160
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 160
favorite 0
quote 0
what doma says is two things. one state does not have to recognize the marriage law, same-sex marriage law, of another state. that would be struck down and then there would have to be another test as to full faith and credit. >> if you move from california to utah and you're getting the recognized marriage in california but not in utah, but in utah living in salt lake city you'd be able to get social security benefits and all the federal stuff. >> you would -- it's not clear. >> it would depend how the court rules in that case. >> if the court reaches the question of full faith and credit, what that is, utah must recognize the marriage laws of california, then, yes -- >> but you'd still be getting your social security checks, wouldn't you? >> it's not clear -- >> let's go back to a clear case. if prop 8 -- if the decision by the ninth , if the decision to strike that down, if that is upheld, where do we stand? what does that do? is equality then the law of the land? is marriage equality the law of land? >> it woul
what doma says is two things. one state does not have to recognize the marriage law, same-sex marriage law, of another state. that would be struck down and then there would have to be another test as to full faith and credit. >> if you move from california to utah and you're getting the recognized marriage in california but not in utah, but in utah living in salt lake city you'd be able to get social security benefits and all the federal stuff. >> you would -- it's not clear....
72
72
Mar 25, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 72
favorite 0
quote 0
doma, the defense of marriage act. it blocks federal recognition of same sex couples in states where they are allowed to marry, denying them about 1,000 federal benefits the other married couples get. when her spouse died and left her the estate, she got a bill from the irs for $363,000. >> i was heart sick. i lost the love of my life and i was heart sick. with this incredible expense. >> reporter: after president obama concluded the law is unconstitutional, house republicans entered the case to defend doma. >> thanks to pete williams who will join our coverage tomorrow and wednesday, if the high court strikes down doma, that would not automatically require states to permit same-sex marriage but the ruling could be a game changer for what all states are allowed to do. let's spin. jonathan capehart, friend of the show hark as piece out in the "washington post" today where he says, i don't think lgbt american fully appreciate how ten with us thing are on the court right now. he is very cautious. in factoring argues that
doma, the defense of marriage act. it blocks federal recognition of same sex couples in states where they are allowed to marry, denying them about 1,000 federal benefits the other married couples get. when her spouse died and left her the estate, she got a bill from the irs for $363,000. >> i was heart sick. i lost the love of my life and i was heart sick. with this incredible expense. >> reporter: after president obama concluded the law is unconstitutional, house republicans...
177
177
May 31, 2012
05/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 177
favorite 0
quote 0
obama's press secretary and whether or not it's validation of the obama administration's stance on doma. >>> possibly no more super-sizing your soda. have you heard about this? mayor michael bloomberg's controversial proposal. >>> a battle over a will that would make it a crime tolingly seek an abortion based on gender. sheila jackson lee joins me to weigh in. [ female announcer ] want to spend less and retire with more? then don't get nickle and dimed by high cost investments and annoying account fees. at e-trade, our free easy-to-use online tools and experienced retirement specialists can help you build a personalized plan. and with our no annual fee iras and a wide range of low cost investments, you can execute the plan you want at a low cost. so meet with us, or go to etrade.com for a great retirement plan with low cost investments. ♪ yoo-hoo. hello. it's water from the drinking fountain at the mall. [ male announcer ] great tasting tap water can come from any faucet anywhere. the brita bottle with the filter inside. after just one use? think again. [ female announcer ] with olay
obama's press secretary and whether or not it's validation of the obama administration's stance on doma. >>> possibly no more super-sizing your soda. have you heard about this? mayor michael bloomberg's controversial proposal. >>> a battle over a will that would make it a crime tolingly seek an abortion based on gender. sheila jackson lee joins me to weigh in. [ female announcer ] want to spend less and retire with more? then don't get nickle and dimed by high cost investments...
87
87
Jun 17, 2013
06/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 87
favorite 0
quote 0
the doma case is a whole lot easier than the prop 8 case. doma is a constitutionalal question. with prop 8 does the supreme court decide to allow same sex couples to get married in california or do they write a less than narrow ruling that would make it possible for same-sex couples who are married or in states where there are civil unions and domestic partnerships and allow them to get married. if that happens you would have seven states where same-sex marriage would become legal like that. >> and that argument is based on what? once you give rights to marriage you have to give them the name. >> exactly. you can't have the same benefits for civil unions and straight married couples but call them different names. >> california -- >> i love the way the court rules. >> so as far as the home stretch goes we have three more days and 14 more opinions coming down. the big four, the math looks bad for progressives here. it looks good for conservatives because the supreme court tends to split up the opinion between the justices and the conservative justices have the most to write. >> d
the doma case is a whole lot easier than the prop 8 case. doma is a constitutionalal question. with prop 8 does the supreme court decide to allow same sex couples to get married in california or do they write a less than narrow ruling that would make it possible for same-sex couples who are married or in states where there are civil unions and domestic partnerships and allow them to get married. if that happens you would have seven states where same-sex marriage would become legal like that....
100
100
Jun 26, 2013
06/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 100
favorite 0
quote 0
prop 8 and doma. the question here is for me the political impact of all of this. >> right. >> we have seen a lot of same-sex marriage ballot initiatives fail. we saw three succeed in 2012. do you see ballot initiatives continuing to go on? obviously it depends on what the court orders. but is that the path most likely outcome going forward in these things? >> that voters continue to have to vote on this. >> yes. >> it seems like we kind of passed that. that era has gone by. partly because people have sort of moved on. when you look at the polls from where the public is on same-sex marriage, much more supportive of it than they were even four or five years ago when the -- these ballot initiatives were all the rage. it seems to me, based on what we have seen, i'm no supreme court analyst, but it seems to me from what we have seen in these past couple of decisions, the court isn't going to make some decision that is going to be very black and white and sweeping and obvious. >> narrow, more likely. >> co
prop 8 and doma. the question here is for me the political impact of all of this. >> right. >> we have seen a lot of same-sex marriage ballot initiatives fail. we saw three succeed in 2012. do you see ballot initiatives continuing to go on? obviously it depends on what the court orders. but is that the path most likely outcome going forward in these things? >> that voters continue to have to vote on this. >> yes. >> it seems like we kind of passed that. that era...
117
117
Mar 8, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 117
favorite 0
quote 0
also known as doma. by the way, he signed it just weeks before his re-election. there are no pictures of that bill signing because, as bob reported there, it happened after midnight and far away from tv cameras. today in washington in our own "washington post," clinton disavowed the bill he signed back there into law writing, quote, in a powerful new op-ed piece on march 27th doma will come before the supreme court and the justices must decide whether it's consistent with the principles of a nation that honors freedom, equality and justice above all and is therefore constitution. as the president who behind the act into law i have come to believe that doma is contrary to those principles and incompatible with our constitution. this follows an amicus brief that signals political shift. dee dee myers knows the president very well. she was first woman press secretary in history and this weekend on bbc you can watch the documentary, what if women ruled the world which is a very wonderful sound to some people. maggie haberman writes for politico. thank you for joining
also known as doma. by the way, he signed it just weeks before his re-election. there are no pictures of that bill signing because, as bob reported there, it happened after midnight and far away from tv cameras. today in washington in our own "washington post," clinton disavowed the bill he signed back there into law writing, quote, in a powerful new op-ed piece on march 27th doma will come before the supreme court and the justices must decide whether it's consistent with the...